If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Network File Server
What is the minimum configuration for a Windows-based network file
server for a small SOHO LAN? Would you use Win2K or XP Pro? The idea is to put disk resources in one machine for ease of maintenance and reduced cost. -- Map Of The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy: http://www.freewebs.com/vrwc/ "You can all go to hell, and I will go to Texas." --David Crockett |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Bob wrote in message ... What is the minimum configuration for a Windows-based network file server for a small SOHO LAN? Not that easy to say unless you say what you plan to store on it. If its just a single place to have most files and those are only used ocassionally, almost anything would be fine, right down to a Celeron 400 class system. The main advantage with that level is that those are very decent for memory etc. The older socket 7 systems can be pretty fussy about ram. Would you use Win2K or XP Pro? XP, basically because its likely to have the user interface a lot closer to what the other PCs are using, and thats always handy for small non professional type situations where you dont normally do much to the server very often. The idea is to put disk resources in one machine for ease of maintenance and reduced cost. It doesnt really have to be a dedicated machine tho. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 2 May 2004 05:49:09 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote: What is the minimum configuration for a Windows-based network file server for a small SOHO LAN? Not that easy to say unless you say what you plan to store on it. Just the usual stuff that home bodies store on PCs. If its just a single place to have most files and those are only used ocassionally, almost anything would be fine, right down to a Celeron 400 class system. That's what I am looking for. The main advantage with that level is that those are very decent for memory etc. How much RAM for Win2K and for XP Pro? I am using 384MB for Win2K so I would expect 128 MB should suffice for a network file server. Would you use Win2K or XP Pro? XP, basically because its likely to have the user interface a lot closer to what the other PCs are using, I am used to Win2K so that is not an issue. I was thinking more in terms of performance. The idea is to put disk resources in one machine for ease of maintenance and reduced cost. It doesnt really have to be a dedicated machine tho. That's true. But if I use my machine then when I am busy with heavy computing I would degrade performance. For example, I have about a dozen Mozilla windows open and refreshing at all times, a market-based charting package in real time and an active trading platform. That's puts a load on the file system as it is, but what happens when my son wants to play a DVD movie and my wife wants to look at some pics? I intend to put 2 removable 3.5" hard drive bays, a DVD/CD-RW burner and a DVD/CDROM highspeed reader on the box. That way we are covered for just about anything we want to do. Thanks for your comments. -- Map Of The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy: http://www.freewebs.com/vrwc/ "You can all go to hell, and I will go to Texas." --David Crockett |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Pentium 75, 32MB, Windows NT, IDE disks up to 135GB.
"Bob" wrote in message ... What is the minimum configuration for a Windows-based network file server for a small SOHO LAN? Would you use Win2K or XP Pro? The idea is to put disk resources in one machine for ease of maintenance and reduced cost. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Bob wrote:
What is the minimum configuration for a Windows-based network file server for a small SOHO LAN? Would you use Win2K or XP Pro? The idea is to put disk resources in one machine for ease of maintenance and reduced cost. I'd use Linux -- more bang for the buck. -- The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to minimize spam. Our true address is of the form . |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 02 May 2004 00:12:34 GMT, "Mr. Grinch"
wrote: Best of luck on your server build. Thanks for all the great advice. How did you get more than 4 disk devices in one box? Did you add a controller card? Speaking of controllers, can anyone recommend a decent RAID setup for a network file server. Can you get by without having to backup disks when you have a decent RAID system? -- Map Of The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy: http://www.freewebs.com/vrwc/ "You can all go to hell, and I will go to Texas." --David Crockett |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 02 May 2004 01:41:34 GMT, CJT wrote:
What is the minimum configuration for a Windows-based network file server for a small SOHO LAN? Would you use Win2K or XP Pro? The idea is to put disk resources in one machine for ease of maintenance and reduced cost. I'd use Linux -- more bang for the buck. How would the other machines running Windows access the file system on such a Linux box? -- Map Of The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy: http://www.freewebs.com/vrwc/ "You can all go to hell, and I will go to Texas." --David Crockett |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
CHKDSK killed my OpenGL subsystem | Skybuck Flying | Nvidia Videocards | 17 | April 28th 10 10:30 AM |
writing cd`s | biggmark | Cdr | 7 | December 31st 04 08:57 AM |
64 bit - Windows Liberty 64bit, Windows Limited Edition 64 Bit, Microsoft SQL Server 2000 Developer Edition 64 Bit, IBM DB2 64 bit - new ! | vvcd | General | 0 | September 17th 04 09:01 PM |
MMC 9.0 "upgrade" | Alan Olson | Ati Videocards | 18 | April 27th 04 10:17 PM |
Help! - The dreaded buffer underrun | XPG | Cdr | 5 | August 31st 03 06:27 PM |